client won photo contest...with my photo

[urbanaries]

I was told one of my clients has won a photo contest with a photo of their child that I shot for them. The magazine has a 1.3 million circulation (the US' largest travel organization). I looked on their website and there is a pretty hefty prize associated, as well as publishing in print and on the website.

The client has not contacted me about this for permission, but she asked my relative to ask me for a "file or some paperwork for the magazine" because she was too busy to get a hold of me. Thankfully my relative told her that she was not going to get involved and that she should absolutely contact me. She has not.

I don't want to rain on their parade, and am pretty sure that she did this without knowing the implications of what she was doing. On the other hand, I feel like she knows she should contact me. Even if she doesn't realize she needs my permission, it seems like common courtesy...then there's the publisher (any print she sent them would have my copyright backprinted). She was never given the digital negatives and the proofs were watermarked.

Should I contact her? Should I contact the publisher? I don't want to get antsy or angry, this could be a cool thing... I just am annoyed that I have not been involved in the process, and the publisher gets away with it.

Advice?

[Moogle Pepper]

My guess is the client thinking that the photo was of her child that it's alright for her to proceed without communicating it with you.

I think you ought to contact her about it.

[Andy]

I was told one of my clients has won a photo contest with a photo of their child that I shot for them. The magazine has a 1.3 million circulation (the US' largest travel organization). I looked on their website and there is a pretty hefty prize associated, as well as publishing in print and on the website.

The client has not contacted me about this for permission, but she asked my relative to ask me for a "file or some paperwork for the magazine" because she was too busy to get a hold of me. Thankfully my relative told her that she was not going to get involved and that she should absolutely contact me. She has not.

I don't want to rain on their parade, and am pretty sure that she did this without knowing the implications of what she was doing. On the other hand, I feel like she knows she should contact me. Even if she doesn't realize she needs my permission, it seems like common courtesy...then there's the publisher (any print she sent them would have my copyright backprinted). She was never given the digital negatives and the proofs were watermarked.

Should I contact her? Should I contact the publisher? I don't want to get antsy or angry, this could be a cool thing... I just am annoyed that I have not been involved in the process, and the publisher gets away with it.

Advice?
What were the contest rules?
Did the entry have to take the photo?
Own the photo?
What license terms did you grant to your client?

[urbanaries]

What were the contest rules?
Did the entry have to take the photo?
Own the photo?
What license terms did you grant to your client?

thanks Andy for your input...

I looked at the rules and it does not appear that they ask for proof or even statement of copyright ownership. No mention of clarifying "who took the photo" at all. Pretty irresponsible...they should know better IMO. Then again, I can't be sure that I'm looking at the correct contest, as I haven't been made privy to details. Magazines like this run photo submission contests frequently it seems.

No copyrights were granted to client. I shot on spec and they ordered prints via smugmug. They signed a model release for *me* to use the photos for promotional purposes....not the other way around.

[Richard]

Well, first of all, congratulations on winning the contest. :clap:clap:clap

I think you ought do something here. At a minimum, you should make sure that you receive proper credit if the photo is going to be published in the magazine or online. Beyond that, I guess you will need to negotiate a reasonable agreement with the magazine and your client. I have no idea of the legalities here, but I am guessing you are on solid ground in asserting your rights.

Regards,

[Scott_Quier]

Congrats on the contesting winning photograph - cool! :thumb

As for your situation, I think I would give the client a call, let her know that a relative mentioned the situation. I would then remind the client that I retain all copyright to photo and that if he/she wants to enter the photo in any contest, "Well, let's make a deal! :D" Do it all with a smile and under the assumption that the client didn't know he/she stepped on toes and that I would be willing to help him/her make it all right.

Before I got into that conversation, however, I think I would first decide what I would do if the client gets nasty about the situation.

[MichaelKirk]

I just want to tag along for the ride on this one to see how it progresses and the final outcome.

Was the contest - a "Beauty Kid" type contest when they are judging the child and not the photo or was it a Photo Contest where they are judging the photo itself? Intentions there make a big difference (to me). If it was an Actual Photo Contest where they are judging the photo itself and your "client" sent in your photo - that "appears" a bit to me as underhanded and purely a plageristic type scenero - kind of like a poetry contest and sending in a poem as your own that you did not write.

Start off civilized and pleasant, but don't let someone profit off of stealing your work.

Keep us updated
Michael

[zacker]

i would call the person, tell her your relative mentioned it to you but... play dumb about tha contest, act like you dont know anything...see if she "fesses up" after you tell her there is no way she can use the pic for that unless she gets written permission and buy the rights to the photo.. so if she says, Opps, i didnt know and i entered and won, you should get at least 1/2 the winnings... if she also plays dumb and doesnt tell you she won.. call the publisher and order them to cease and dissist and to not publis your phot as YOU own all the rights to it and didnt enter it. if she lied, dont rain on her parade.... Pour on it!!!

[Llywellyn]

What confuses me, and puts me on guard, is that your client had the time to contact your relative but doesn't have the time to contact you directly? Seems to me a long way 'round to do things--which usually adds time instead of condensing it by going straight to the source. :scratch

[urbanaries]

thanks for the input everyone! Many of you are thinking along the same lines I am....but given that there is a familial relationship, I don't want to go wojo on her. If I approach the publisher, it's all but guaranteed they'll just disqualify the entry rather than deal with the legal issues. And then I'll be the evil photographer that crushed her little girl's excitement....

I'm going to send a nice, "playing dumb" email and see what I get. At the absolute minimum I need to be credited for the photo, and while the vacation/$ prize should be mine, I hesitate to appear greedy and snotty. (She is my stepmom's sister, obviously they are closer to each other than to me).

And yes, it is not a true photographic competition but a "send us your best kid/vacation/pet photo contest". So I can understand why she thought it was ok, but I really do think that most people with a brain would think to notify the photographer themselves if not before entering, certainly before the publishing!

[thenimirra]

wow....I'm so sorry to hear this, but I'm still new to the biz too so I will be following the thread to see what becomes of this. It's a very cautionary tale regarding ownership of photos. Hang in there and let us know what happens.

[BeachBill]

I looked at the rules and it does not appear that they ask for proof or even statement of copyright ownership.

Wow, I agree that is pretty irresponsible of the magazine. If you are reading the correct rules, then I would have to say the magazine is more at fault than your step aunt. If the rules don't mention anything about taking the photo yourself, then the magazine would be solely at fault and responsible for any copyright infringement.

Anyway, I hope this all works out in the end for you. I too will be keeping an eye on this thread watching for the outcome.

[mr peas]

Whats the prize? If it was a million buckoos, then whoa nelly, you should get a snap of that cash money right now and start buying some L-glasses, you know? But on the other hand, if this is a family member be it not by blood or not and it makes them happy, you should get at least a big ol' thank you.

Tsk tsk, this is the hardest part, its hardest to deal with family when it comes to cash or prizes for that matter, wouldnt want to have a negative relationship with your family members now and have awkward holidays right?

I think your best option is to straight up say, "hey you won the contest with the photo I took, can I get a little something on my end?".

If you think about it long enough, its a contest for parents and their kids, if it was a contest with photographers vs other photographers and another photog. took your photo and used it as their own then thats a diff. story. But this is their kid not yours and they have just about 75% say in the matter, but they do owe you an explanation at the least and a damn big THANK YOU. I mean, you just sent them to a clean-free vay-kay, and no thanks?

Handle it!

[Angelo]

I was told one of my clients has won a photo contest with a photo of their child that I shot for them.

Are you over reacting? Who told you this information? Is it verifiable?

Her needing to contact you for "a file or some paperwork for the magazine" is a clear indication the magazine won't publish the image as presented. You can simply wait this out until the formal request is made at which point I would cooperate or deny depending on the terms of the request. Maybe she has every intent to honor you as the photographer.

You could also, upon verification of the situation, contact the magazine with advance notice that you hold copyright on the image and any violation will be met with demand for specific performance.

[urbanaries]

Are you over reacting? Who told you this information? Is it verifiable?

well, I haven't reacted at all yet, so no :DI just wanted to get a feel for what others had to say on the matter before putting my foot in my mouth.

My stepmother (whom I consider very trustworthy) told me. The client is her sister, whom I don't know very well at all; she hired me about a year ago for one session.

Her needing to contact you for "a file or some paperwork for the magazine" is a clear indication the magazine won't publish the image as presented. You can simply wait this out until the formal request is made at which point I would cooperate or deny depending on the terms of the request. Maybe she has every intent to honor you as the photographer.

I think you're right, and I'm going to sit tight for another day or so, but I honestly don't want to find out (after the fact) that it was already published without proper credit.

[ShepsMom]

I wonder what contest it was, there are a lot of this kind of stuff going on online now a days. I hope it's nothing hokey pokey, plus no rules regarding ownership/copyright would sounds like something to be aware of.
Any legit type of contest would have strict rules in regards to entry, anything else is just "blah blah blah..." type of thing.
Did she have to pay to enter contest?
I'd check into this more if i were you.

Good luck!

[MichaelKirk]

I would definately want to read the fine print of the contest rules.
Agree - there are so many of these "contest" now das with the intent of getting "stock" type images for next to nothing in cost$$. Fine print says by sending in yout photo you loose all rights and the company holding the contest now retains all rights and usage of submitted images - easy way to build a lost cost stock imventory of images.

Hopefully it's on the up and up and you get to share a weeks vacation with a relative.

Michael



I wonder what contest it was, there are a lot of this kind of stuff going on online now a days. I hope it's nothing hokey pokey, plus no rules regarding ownership/copyright would sounds like something to be aware of.
Any legit type of contest would have strict rules in regards to entry, anything else is just "blah blah blah..." type of thing.
Did she have to pay to enter contest?
I'd check into this more if i were you.

Good luck!

[jeffreaux2]

My instincts tell me that if she HONESTLY thought she had not crossed any boundries, then she would have already been in touch with you to share in her excitement.

I have a BIG problem with this whole scenario. It would seem at some point that SHE should be disqualified for NOT taking the photograph. I am sure the other contestants would NOT appreciate knowing that the winner was taken by a pro. It is underhanded at every turn...even if the rules aren't explicit.

I am also interested in how this turns out.

If it were me, I would just call her and say that while you are flattered that one of your photos won a contest, you will not allow it to be published without due credit. Period. There is nothing wrong with that. The publisher would likely drop it like a hot potato if you called and told them you did not give them the right to reproduce.


Fair and honest ...this is what this is about.

[ChrisJ]

:lurk Nothing really to add that hasn't already been said. But I'm interested to hear the outcome (and see the picture if/when you can post it!).

[evoryware]

I just can't believe she didn't contact you about it but contacted your family member about it. Let's see how busy she is on that vacation w/o you.


:lurk

[urbanaries]

I just can't believe she didn't contact you about it but contacted your family member about it. Let's see how busy she is on that vacation w/o you.:lurk

Well, in all fairness she sees her own sister about 100x more often than she sees me...but STILL.

Email sent this a.m....."I heard about a magazine publishing a photo of mine and wondered what the scoop was?"

I don't even know what photo it is yet...I'll let you guys know what I find out.!

thanks for all the responses!!!

[Scott_Quier]

Well, in all fairness she sees her own sister about 100x more often than she sees me...but STILL.

Email sent this a.m....."I heard about a magazine publishing a photo of mine and wondered what the scoop was?"

I don't even know what photo it is yet...I'll let you guys know what I find out.!

thanks for all the responses!!!
Here's me - waiting, holding my breath!

[Art Scott]

Here's me - waiting, holding my breath!

Me toooooo!! Turning blue...................

[Angelo]

Email sent this a.m....."I heard about a magazine publishing a photo of mine and wondered what the scoop was?"


goodonya...

this should have been your first step.


:lurk

[aj986s]

Maybe the same can be said about "Don't mix family & contests" :D

Good luck! Hopefully its only an unfortunate misunderstanding, and no one has to appear on Judge Judy....

[urbanaries]

Here we go! apparently not a contest. Remember the game "telephone" as a kid? :rofl

It is for her work's magazine which does happen to be the same company, but instead of a contest, they want to use it as editorial.

She "wanted to make sure that was okay with you and to see if you might still have that picture because we never did get it on a CD. We of course would give you credit for the picture. Let me know what you think. It goes to 200,000+ households."

Of course she "never did get it on CD"...as if that was a complaint. I think I need to talk to the editor of this publication. She clearly doesn't understand copyrights at all, so I don't want to be hostile, but it needs to be clear that I'm not "okay" with it. Or maybe I should be ok with it, as the exposure might be nice. Help!

[urbanaries]

and here's a link to the photo if anyone's interested. Serious buyers only! :rofl
http://www.lynnehulbertphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/2606273_E2jvZ/1/137481660_SPWZf#137481660

[bham]

First of all great shot. Second if there is an attached article besides just a photo credit find out what the article is about. There maybe a way that can work you name, info into the article. If you decide the free publicity is worth it. You probably should at least charge for the digital file IMHO.

[Scott_Quier]

Tough call, but I think I would contact the editors/publishers of the mag and find out what the real deal is. Then, once you have the rules of the game, make a decision about whether this is something you want to allow, and at what price (could be the exposure is worth allowing the photo to be in print???). But, I think you're right about the lady not really understanding the legal/copyright issues involved here.

This is me, waiting for the next installment in the epic saga of .....

[mbellot]

"It goes to 200,000+ households."

Any magazine with that kind of circulation should know a thing or two about copyright...

How's a penny a copy sound? :D

[ShepsMom]

Nice shot!!!

Penny a shot? How much does it make? :scratch

[PineapplePhoto]

Nice shot!!!

Penny a shot? How much does it make? :scratch

$ 2,000 :wink

[Icebear]

$ 2,000 :wink

Riiiiggghhhht . . . that'll happen. Without knowing anything about the magazine except the circ of 200k, I'd venture a guess at about $350 as a price that should be satisfactory to both the editor and the photographer, assuming it's printed at, say, 1/4 page.

I'll admit though, that it IS a $million shot!

[gus]

Riiiiggghhhht . . . that'll happen. Without knowing anything about the magazine except the circ of 200k, I'd venture a guess at about $350
That sounds about right....if they published it 'after' they got permission. If your copyright is breached then there are often damages associated .

[ChatKat]

That sounds about right....if they published it 'after' they got permission. If your copyright is breached then there are often damages associated .

I am in a workshop this week, and the more I study the business side of photography, I find that most of our issues with copyrights and use come down to educating our clients when we shoot and have them sign model released. The more I hear of these illegal uses, the more it makes me want to talk to the clients before I shoot and they sign. I had images stolen before I had my SM site.

I think 200,000 for editorial use is worth more than $350

[gus]

I think 200,000 for editorial use is worth more than $350
Not if i catch you stealing one of my photos it wont be. If i dont know about it then fine.

[urbanaries]

In response to my request to talk with managing editor she says, "is that going to cost anything?"

UGH! If I have to educate her on the implications of what she is trying to do, and why it's not "cool with me"..... it's going to be very difficult to avoid embarrassing and upsetting her.

[mercphoto]

In response to my request to talk with managing editor she says, "is that going to cost anything?"
Ugh. How about "do I have to pay to buy that magazine on the newsstand? :D Or how about "they want you to write them an article for publication, is that going to cost them anything or do you get a salary or commission for that?" :D In short, why should the photo for the article and the magazine be free, but not the writing of the article and the selling of the magazine?

[urbanaries]

Ugh. How about "do I have to pay to buy that magazine on the newsstand? :D Or how about "they want you to write them an article for publication, is that going to cost them anything or do you get a salary or commission for that?" :D In short, why should the photo for the article and the magazine be free, but not the writing of the article and the selling of the magazine?

Well, to be fair it is a "Member Magazine"....not a magazine on the newsstands. But marketing collateral (brochures, ads etc) still are subject to the same licensing protocol. People don't understand licensing and copyright, but those marketing folks do...guaranteed!

Here is my short, sweet, non threatening attempt at a response...

Is that going to cost anything?
For a publication of that nature, a licensing fee is standard practice. I will also need to know technical specs from them as to sizing and resolution, color space and file format required for their press.

I am sure the managing editor won't have a problem contacting me; they are likely well-versed in the routine!

Thanks!

[urbanaries]

Riiiiggghhhht . . . that'll happen. Without knowing anything about the magazine except the circ of 200k, I'd venture a guess at about $350 as a price that should be satisfactory to both the editor and the photographer, assuming it's printed at, say, 1/4 page.

I'll admit though, that it IS a $million shot!

Really? i find it rather....ordinary myself...:scratch

But anyway, I was thinking the same thing, around $300 given that it's marketing collateral and not a true "magazine."

I buy photos ALL THE TIME for our marketing efforts, and I work for a university...so even non-profits don't expect free photos. The only time I ask for license waivers is when I am literally producing educational materials. And even then, I'm using the product photos eagerly supplied by the pharma manufacturing companies.

It's not like this magazine goes to the post office and says, "hey, we want to mail these 200K magazines for free!" it's just part of production costs.

[mercphoto]

But anyway, I was thinking the same thing, around $300 given that it's marketing collateral and not a true "magazine."
For what its worth, nearly two years ago I licensed a photo for $350 for an 8th grade Texas mathematics text book. This was a spec photo I took at a kart race, not a photo on assignment, and they somehow found my photo.

If a state school text book can afford to pay for photos, surely a magazine can.

[urbanaries]

Still no word from the editor, but the client emailed me back and said "the editor already has purchased stock photos but does not pay individuals for photos as she prefers to use employee and grandkid photos. I really want the girls in the magazine so i'll just take some myself and send to her. Thanks anyway."

How does she think those stock photos get taken? Surely not by "individual photographers".

So I'm the bad guy for not immediately fawning over such a nice "favor".

[evoryware]

That's ridiculous, but I'd assume she probably has no clue because it took me a long time and I still don't fully understand submission and sale of stock photos. Seems like stock is a ripoff to me.

[urbanaries]

Well, I guess I just lost an opportunity on principle. I think they really expected me to just blindly submit a high res photo and have no contract or real "terms" let alone money exchange. I think I was most upset that it was told to me as an afterthought, instead of someone approaching me and asking my permission. And then stonewalling when I simply asked to be put in touch with the editor.

I think the client just wanted her kids in the mag no matter what, and didn't want me messing it up for her. So now I have, and I'm sure she won't forget that.

I have a history of burning bridges this way; it's just not in my nature to help others take advantage of me. But maybe that would be a better feeling than being the assertive "bad guy!" Although I bet if I were a man the client wouldn't have tried to play me like this; women are expected to give the business away because it's the "polite" thing to do. /rant

[MichaelKirk]

Quick pricing from fotoquote - rights managed, limited use - Medium range

Usage TermsUnited States, Editorial, Magazine Editorial.Trade, 1/4 Page, Up to 25,000


PriceUSD $ 233



So that is a "range of what they should be paying if they bought it legit.
You can add to that what you seem fit.

Michael

[mercphoto]

Still no word from the editor, but the client emailed me back and said "the editor already has purchased stock photos but does not pay individuals for photos as she prefers to use employee and grandkid photos. I really want the girls in the magazine so i'll just take some myself and send to her. Thanks anyway."

How does she think those stock photos get taken? Surely not by "individual photographers".

So I'm the bad guy for not immediately fawning over such a nice "favor".
Its this simple. The magazine doesn't want to pay, that's their choice. Nobody can force anyone to buy anything or fork over money. Except the government. (shameless plug for www.fairtax.org!) She wants pics of her kids in the magazines and she is willing to take the pics and give them to the magazine. That is her choice and she's free to do so. If she wants better pics than she can get herself she could hire someone (like you...) And, all along these same lines, nobody can force or expect you to hand over the fruits of your labor for free.

After my brief few years in photography, fortunately not as a primary source of income, I have to admit I also find pricing difficult. I'm sure your client is thinking "you have already taken the photograph, I've already paid you for it, its just sitting on a hard disk, why do you need more $$$ for something you've already taken and sold?" And frankly I think it boils down to (someone please tell me if I'm wrong, why I'm wrong, and how to better explain this!) is a difference between cost-pricing and value-pricing. And photography, it seems, is usually value-priced. There is extra value in seeing that image in a magazine, hence the extra cost. There is extra value in a full-page photo versus a quarter-page, hence the extra cost.

[darkdragon]

Well, I guess I just lost an opportunity on principle. I think they really expected me to just blindly submit a high res photo and have no contract or real "terms" let alone money exchange. I think I was most upset that it was told to me as an afterthought, instead of someone approaching me and asking my permission. And then stonewalling when I simply asked to be put in touch with the editor.

Well, you could still contact the editor right? Find out who the editor is and email her. Seems silly of them to accept a photo without making sure the employee took or has rights to reproduce the image. Also seems silly for your client to have assumed that you would just give her whatever she wants for free. Heck, even if you DO burn the bridge - probably less stress on you if that is what she is like. Ya know?

I think you did the right thing and handled it well. I probably would have caved because I would have though "OMG! Someone likes my picture!" :rofl But then, I'm no pro.

[ziggy53]

"... I really want the girls in the magazine so i'll just take some myself and send to her. Thanks anyway."

...

I have a suspicion that the images your relative (step aunt) takes on her own may not be quite as good. :wink

It sounds like your stepmother (I hope I understood that relationship correctly) understands the proper way to do things and hopefully she will support you. So what if her sister wants "something for nothing". Does she always have to get what she wants?

Wish your relative "good luck" and hope she gets the message that you will not be taken advantage of.

[Sam]

Well, I guess I just lost an opportunity on principle. I think they really expected me to just blindly submit a high res photo and have no contract or real "terms" let alone money exchange. I think I was most upset that it was told to me as an afterthought, instead of someone approaching me and asking my permission. And then stonewalling when I simply asked to be put in touch with the editor.

I think the client just wanted her kids in the mag no matter what, and didn't want me messing it up for her. So now I have, and I'm sure she won't forget that.

I have a history of burning bridges this way; it's just not in my nature to help others take advantage of me. But maybe that would be a better feeling than being the assertive "bad guy!" Although I bet if I were a man the client wouldn't have tried to play me like this; women are expected to give the business away because it's the "polite" thing to do. /rant

"Although I bet if I were a man the client wouldn't have tried to play me like this; women are expected to give the business away because it's the "polite" thing to do. /rant"

I am now lighting the match.......strike........there there dear, here's a tissue, dry your eyes, put your apron on and go back to the kitchen. Hummmm, is that lighter fluid I see being poured on the floor around my feet? :D (no rant)

It ain't about being male or female. It's just people, deal with it.

Sam

[gus]

"Although I bet if I were a man the client wouldn't have tried to play me like this; women are expected to give the business away because it's the "polite" thing to do. /rant"

I am now lighting the match.......strike........there there dear, here's a tissue, dry your eyes, put your apron on and go back to the kitchen. Hummmm, is that lighter fluid I see being poured on the floor around my feet? :D (no rant)

It ain't about being male or female. It's just people, deal with it.

Sam
I honestly dont know where you are going with that sam but it does not quite sound right to me.

Maybe im misinterpreting your post ??

[urbanaries]

"Although I bet if I were a man the client wouldn't have tried to play me like this; women are expected to give the business away because it's the "polite" thing to do. /rant"

I am now lighting the match.......strike........there there dear, here's a tissue, dry your eyes, put your apron on and go back to the kitchen. Hummmm, is that lighter fluid I see being poured on the floor around my feet? :D (no rant)

It ain't about being male or female. It's just people, deal with it.

Sam

I totally deserved that..it's probably more about the fact that I don't like being the bad guy, whereas men generally don't seem to feel "guilty" about asserting their rights.

But thanks for the condescending apron remark, I got a laugh out of it! Although I don't really understand the fire part.... :scratch

[Icebear]

it's just not in my nature to help others take advantage of me

And that attitude will go a long way toward keeping you sane and not bitter. If we let others take advantage of us, it festers and we become hateful. Good for you.

And . . . I still think something doesn't smell right. Any magazine photo editor knows you don't publish a photo without knowing the providence. Methinks Mom was thinking to pass off your photo as hers and got caught.:tough

[evoryware]

It smelled like fish...
Just more growing pains.
You already learned when you give an inch people take a mile. You raised your prices and maybe need to rethink how you explain your model release.
This is just more reason why photogs need to stop giving stuff away.
If anyone should have control over the picture getting into the contest, it's you.
Doesn't matter man or woman, people want to go the path of least resistance. She tried and got caught. The next thing is will she try and shoot the same pose w/ her own camera to get a shot in the mag? Then you'd have to fight her and the magazine on that.
Only thing she regrets is telling your stepmother I bet.

[saurora]

This has been an interesting thread to follow. I think you did the right thing Lynne, and I wouldn't lose any sleep over 'burning bridges'. What I would do though, is consider some verbiage to add into your portrait 'contracts' that offers clients an explanation regarding copyrights and what they can and cannot do with the images they have paid for. And of course, this would be something they would sign up front. :D Even if it's a friend or family member and you're not charging them, you could give them a contract showing no charge, but read them the verbiage and ask them to sign. I know you had some issues a while back with some wedding photos being 'shared' on a website without you being compensated. It's happening too often. I'm sure others before you have learned this hard lesson and could offer some ideas along that line. (Might not be a bad idea to have this verbiage posted on your website info page as well.) There does seem to be a whole lot of confusion regarding copyrights and I guess it is up to us as photographers to state the rules up front and educate our clients. After all, think about how many waivers you sign in a year's time for a variety of businesses. It's standard practice. (It's a darling shot BTW! :lust )

[ShepsMom]

I agree with Saurora, meanwhile, don't stress yourself out regarding the issue, it's a done deal as far as i can see. Look into the future and make sure nothing like this happens again.
If your client going to take a picture for them to be published, see if you can get a copy of that issue so we can see the picture :eat

[urbanaries]

Thank you evoryware, Icebear, Ziggy, Saurora and Shepsmom...and anyone else I forgot!

You guys have really made my day with your support!!!

I definitely will work on my policy/education with clients about this type of thing. I'll share it with y'all to use when I do.

And I'm definitely going to try to get a copy of the magazine and see what beat me out! :rofl

Seriously, you guys rock...thanks...I stress out about disappointing/saying no to folks far more than I should.

[MJRPHOTO]

Thank you evoryware, Icebear, Ziggy, Saurora and Shepsmom...and anyone else I forgot!

You guys have really made my day with your support!!!

I definitely will work on my policy/education with clients about this type of thing. I'll share it with y'all to use when I do.

And I'm definitely going to try to get a copy of the magazine and see what beat me out! :rofl

Seriously, you guys rock...thanks...I stress out about disappointing/saying no to folks far more than I should.
Glad you stood your ground.

For those of you who did not see my link to this already.
Mr. Harlan Ellison (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE)

[urbanaries]

Glad you stood your ground.

For those of you who did not see my link to this already.
Mr. Harlan Ellison (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE)

that's fantastic. If it was "PG" I might even send her a link!!!

[saurora]

Glad you stood your ground.

For those of you who did not see my link to this already.
Mr. Harlan Ellison (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE)

Oh that is so awesome! This guy is just a little passionate about the subject and rightfully so!!!! :barb

[Art Scott]

Glad you stood your ground.

For those of you who did not see my link to this already.
Mr. Harlan Ellison (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE)

This is a fantastic interview...Loved it:thumb

[Alexander]

I agree, it was correct to stand up for your rights, on principle!

But:
...see if you can get a copy of that issue so we can see the picture :eatPublishing a pic out of a magazine here would be the exact same legal "mistake"... right?

[Scott_Quier]

I agree, it was correct to stand up for your rights, on principle!

But:
Publishing a pic out of a magazine here would be the exact same legal "mistake"... right?
Maybe not if one supplies appropriate citation/copyright information? I don't know, but I do know that posting here would not be for commercial purposes :D

[Alexander]

Maybe not if one supplies appropriate citation/copyright information? I don't know, but I do know that posting here would not be for commercial purposes :DErrr... Nope, supplying information will not be enough, and uncommercial purposes wouldn't either.

...or are you pulling my leg? :rolleyes

[Scott_Quier]

Errr... Nope, supplying information will not be enough, and uncommercial purposes wouldn't either.

...or are you pulling my leg? :rolleyes
No. INAL - I plead ignorance.